VOLUME 48 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2014 ) > List of Articles
Sujata Siwatch, Goter Doke
Citation Information : Siwatch S, Doke G. Sublingual vs Oral Misoprostol for Labor Induction. J Postgrad Med Edu Res 2014; 48 (1):33-36.
DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10028-1097
Published Online: 01-12-2015
Copyright Statement: Copyright © 2014; The Author(s).
This study compares the eficacy and safety of sublingual 160 women admitted for induction of labor at the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh were randomized to receive 25 µg misoprostol orally 3 hourly or 25 µg sublingual misoprostol 4 hourly for labor induction. The two groups were compared for number of women not delivered in 24 hours, misoprostol dose required, induction delivery interval, incidence of uterine contraction abnormalities, mode of delivery, side effects and neonatal outcomes. Low dose of misoprostol is eficacious with both routes of administration. Majority women delivered vaginally and of them, comparable numbers in both vaginal and sublingual misoprostol groups delivered within 24 hours of induction (93.1 and 83.7%). The sublingual route is associated with a statistically signiicant lesser induction to delivery interval (14.8 ± 6.2 hours The low dose of 25 µg is eficacious and safe by both sublingual and oral routes. Sublingual route has lesser induction to delivery interval and lesser requirement for oxytocin augmentation. Siwatch S, Doke G, Kalra J Bagga R. Sublingual